DATE: Wednesday, July 16, 1997              TAG: 9707160014

SECTION: LOCAL                   PAGE: B12  EDITION: FINAL 

TYPE: Editorial

                                            LENGTH:   55 lines

DAY CARE STATE OVERSIGHT LAX

The Allen administration's pell-mell race to cut the state government work force has had its price in the enforcement field, as a new report on day-care regulation in Virginia makes clear.

Buyouts of employees willing to leave government jobs, combined with an ongoing hiring freeze, have resulted in about 700 day-care facilities escaping the two inspections required annually. In addition, 159 - including 84 in Hampton Roads - were not inspected at all last year.

There simply weren't enough inspectors to do the job.

While steps are being taken to close the gap, the study by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission is a reminder that the state continues to do less than it should to protect the health and safety of children.

Perhaps the most damning part of the report is the indication that, even when problems are found, it can be years before they are corrected or a center shut down. This is not universally true, but it is true in enough instances to warrant concern.

In one case cited by JLARC, a center with a licensed capacity of 25 children was advised in June 1996 that the Department of Social Services intended to revoke its license. This followed several years in which a series of violations were found and improvements were urged.

The revocation process is so cumbersome, however, that a year later the center continues to operate.

While the rights of business men and women deserve protection, the primary concern in this instance should be children. JLARC recommended that the legislature consider increasing the powers of state officials in several ways: giving the commissioner unilateral authority to reduce or freeze enrollments in centers accused of serious violations, allowing the DSS to impose monetary fines and authorizing the department to require parental notification of licensing violations.

Certainly, the last step should be approved immediately. Parents need to be able to make informed judgments about the facilities they are chosing. The other proposals deserve scrutiny as well.

The all-or-nothing nature of current enforcement techniques (usually state officials either take no formal action or begin revocation proceedings) leaves too much leeway for serious but not critical concerns to go unattended.

What the JLARC report did not address is the broader issue of the quality of day-care services in the commonwealth, beyond health and safety. The trend over the past four years has been to say that it's up to parents, not the state, to address programmatic issues and find quality care.

That is well and good, so long as parents have the time, energy and facts needed to make informed choices. In many cases, they do not.

The next administration should re-evaluate the current hands-off attitude toward encouraging a supply of good and affordable day care. In an era when most children spend some time being cared for in a home or facility other than their own, the state has a compelling interest in quality care, one that exceeds even the allure of a smaller state work force.

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu